key issues for Europe`s response to drugs

Transcription

SELECTED
ISSUE
2012
I S S N 183 0 - 7957
PREGNANCY, CHILDCARE AND THE FAMILY: KEY ISSUES
FOR EUROPE’S RESPONSE TO DRUGS
2012
SELECTED
ISSUE
PREGNANCY, CHILDCARE AND THE FAMILY: KEY ISSUES
FOR EUROPE’S RESPONSE TO DRUGS
Legal notice
This publication of the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) is protected by copyright. The
EMCDDA accepts no responsibility or liability for any consequences arising from the use of the data contained in this
document. The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the official opinions of the EMCDDA’s partners, the EU
Member States or any institution or agency of the European Union.
A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet. It can be accessed through the
Europa server (http://europa.eu).
Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union.
Freephone number (*):
00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11
(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed.
This publication is available in English.
Cataloguing data can be found at the end of this publication.
Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2012
ISBN 978-92-9168-559-2
doi: 10.2810/72819
© European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction, 2012
Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.
Printed in Spain
Printed
on white chlorine - free paper
Cais do Sodré, 1249–289 Lisbon, Portugal
Tel. +351 211210200 • Fax +351 218131711
[email protected] • www.emcdda.europa.eu
Cont ent s
Introductory note and acknowledgements
5
Introduction
7
Pregnant drug users
8
Risks of drug use during pregnancy
8
Responses to drug use among pregnant women
9
Policy and legal frameworks concerning pregnant
drug users
Drug users living with children
13
14
Risks related to drug use in the family
14
Responses targeting drug-using parents
16
Responses targeting drug users’ children
20
Policy and legal frameworks concerning
drug-using parents and their children
22
Conclusions
24
References
26
3
Introductory note and acknowledgements
In-depth reviews of topical interest are published as Selected issues each year. These reports are based on information
provided to the EMCDDA by the EU Member States and candidate countries and Norway as part of the national reporting
process.
The most recent Selected issues are:
Mortality related to drug use in Europe: public health implications;
• Guidelines for the treatment of drug dependence: a European perspective;
• Cost and financing of drug treatment services in Europe: an exploratory study;
• Treatment and care for older drug users;
• Problem amphetamine and methamphetamine use in Europe;
• Trends in injecting drug use in Europe.
All Selected issues (in English) and summaries (in up to 23 languages) are available on the EMCDDA website:
http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/publications/selected-issues
The EMCDDA would like to thank the following for their help in producing this Selected issue:
• the heads of Reitox national focal points, their staff and the national experts on drug-related deaths;
• the services within each Member State that collected the raw data;
• the members of the Management Board and the Scientific Committee of the EMCDDA;
• the Publications Office of the European Union.
Reitox national focal points
Reitox is the European information network on drugs and drug addiction. The network is comprised of national focal points in the EU
Member States, Norway and the candidate countries and at the European Commission. Under the responsibility of their
governments, the focal points are the national authorities providing drug information to the EMCDDA.
The contact details of the national focal points may be found at:
http://www.emcdda.europa.eu/about/partners/reitox-network
5
Introduction
Most drug users are young adults of childbearing age. Indeed,
treatment data indicates that almost one in ten of all clients
entering treatment live with at least one child. Furthermore, the
number of drug users entering treatment who report living with
children has been increasing over the last five years. The risks
of using drugs during pregnancy have been well documented,
and the harms related to drug use in families with children are
well known. However, not all pregnant women who use drugs
have problems during or after their pregnancies, and not all
parents with drug problems have difficulty caring for their
children. Still, a common and often well-founded concern of
drug-using parents is that they are inevitably viewed as
neglectful and their children will be taken away from them.
There are, however, an array of programmes to help both
pregnant drug users and drug-using parents. To date, though,
no comprehensive information has been available on the
extent of these problems in Europe, and how they are
responded to at European level.
The objective of this Selected issue, therefore, is to provide a
European overview of the available responses (interventions,
laws and policies) to these problems, along with a
description of available European studies on the risks of
drug use during pregnancy and for drug-using parents and
their children. The information presented here is based on a
dedicated data collection exercise that was carried out in
23 European countries (see Figure 1) through the Reitox
network of national focal points, supplemented by data
routinely collected by the EMCDDA through the Exchange
on Drug Demand Reduction Action (EDDRA). This
information varied in scope and depth, with several
countries reporting extensively on a wide range of
interventions available to help families affected by drugs,
while other countries were able to provide only limited
amounts of information owing to a lack of specific
responses, for example, or because these target populations
are addressed by general services only. Much of the
information presented in this report is based on publications
in the national languages of the reporting countries, and on
data that were specifically reported by countries for this
publication and therefore may be unavailable in this format
anywhere else. Information presented here reflects the
presence of responses and not necessarily the extent of
Figure 1: Countries covered in this publication
Participating in
special data
collection
Data from other
EMCDDA sources
coverage or the effectiveness or evidence base of these
interventions. The systematic assessment of the evidence
base of interventions and the evaluation of their impact are
important tasks, but are outside the scope of this publication.
Based on the input from the responding countries, this
Selected issue provides a broad overview, with examples
drawn from a wide range of European countries, and
constitutes a comprehensive picture of what Member States
have done to help these vulnerable populations.
The first section of the publication deals with pregnant drug
users, and the second section describes the situation
regarding drug-using parents and their children. Both
sections first describe studies reported by the national focal
points on the harms of drug use, and then continue by
delineating available responses (including prevention, harm
reduction, treatment, law and policies). There is often an
overlap in responses: in many cases, multidisciplinary care
is available from the beginning of pregnancy through early,
and in some cases late, childhood; and law and policies
sometimes make no distinction between pregnant drug users
and drug-using parents, but consider the interest of the child,
even if it is unborn.
7
Pregnant drug users
Data on the prevalence of drug use among pregnant women
are not available for most European countries. Where
information is available, it often comes from isolated studies
using various methodologies, and the results are not readily
comparable. A study conducted in an inner-city maternity
hospital in Dublin, Ireland, in 1992, for example, found that
4% of antenatal and 6% of postnatal women tested positive
for drug metabolites. In a recent study, also using biological
specimens, hair analysis showed that 16% of mothers giving
birth in an Ibiza hospital had used illicit drugs during the
third trimester of their pregnancy (Friguls et al., 2012),
although only 2% of mothers reported drug use during their
pregnancy. In Latvia, mothers reported drug use in 0.2% of
live births and 0.8% of stillbirths. The National Registry of
Mothers at Childbirth in the Czech Republic reported a
prevalence of 1.8% of illicit drug use among over 1 million
mothers between 2000 and 2009.
The true prevalence of drug use among pregnant women,
however, is difficult to ascertain, and differences across
countries or in certain areas may also exist. Ireland, for
example, reported that the proportion of urine samples that
tested positive for drug metabolites was higher among
women admitted for labour than among women attending
scheduled antenatal visits. One reason for this may be that
women who use drugs are less likely to receive antenatal care
than women who are drug free. In Latvia, for example,
antenatal care is received before the 12th week of pregnancy
by 90% of expectant women in the general population,
compared with 70% of those who had ever used drugs.
Risks of drug use during pregnancy
All psychoactive drugs, including alcohol, tobacco and
some prescribed medications, may have adverse effects on
the pregnancy, the unborn child and the newborn. Different
drugs, however, may act differently (Table 1). This may be a
result of not only to the drug itself, but also the poor overall
health and the nutritional status of the drug-using expectant
Table 1: Health harms associated with substance use during pregnancy
Alcohol
Tobacco
Cannabis
Amphetamines
Low birth weight
+
+
+
+
Miscarriage
+
+
+
+
Perinatal mortality
+
+
Developmental problems in childhood
+
+
Foetal morbidity
+
+
Premature birth
+
Decreased foetal growth
+
Impaired intrauterine growth
+
+
Neonatal withdrawal symptoms
+
+
Premature rupture of membranes, placental abruption
Preterm delivery
Respiratory depression
Cocaine
Opioids
+
+
+ (a )
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
(a)
Related to withdrawal.
NB:The effect of these drugs may be confounded by polydrug use and/or other health and lifestyle factors associated with drug use.
Source:
A summary of the health harms of drugs, The Centre for Public Health, Faculty of Health & Applied Social Science, Liverpool John Moore’s University,
on behalf of the Department of Health and National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse (2011).
8
Pregnancy, childcare and the family: key issues for Europe’s response to drugs
mother. The degree of the impact of drug use during
pregnancy largely depends on the intensity of drug use.
Neonatal abstinence syndrome
Several studies in the Netherlands have assessed the
short- and long-term effects of cannabis use during
pregnancy. Short-term effects included reduced foetal
growth, smaller foetal head size, reductions in the foetal
placental and cardiac blood flow, and low birth weight (El
Marroun et al., 2009). The effect of cannabis (usually
combined with tobacco) on intrauterine growth seemed
stronger than that of antenatal tobacco exposure alone,
and heavier use was associated with increased harm (El
Marroun et al., 2010). At the age of 18 months, girls – but
not boys – who were exposed to cannabis or tobacco in
the womb showed increased aggression and attention
problems, although the latter association disappeared
when controlled for confounders (El Marroun et al., 2011).
As the child grows older, however, these effects may
disappear.
The use of cocaine, opioids and potentially other drugs
during pregnancy may lead to withdrawal symptoms in the
newborn. Neonatal withdrawal, also referred to as
neonatal abstinence syndrome, is characterised by signs of
hyper-irritability of the central nervous system,
gastrointestinal dysfunction, impaired breathing and
generalised symptoms such as yawning, sneezing and
fever. Studies in the United Kingdom have found overall
neonatal abstinence syndrome rates as high as 68% among
the newborns of opioid-using mothers, with a dose–
response relationship between maternal drug use and the
development of the syndrome (Scottish Executive, 2006). In
these studies, about half of the babies who were initially
asymptomatic developed delayed onset neonatal
abstinence syndrome, and, while many of the babies who
received treatment were well by age 20 weeks, about a
quarter required long-term follow-up and care.
The vasoconstrictive effect of cocaine and amphetamines, as
described by studies in the national reports of Belgium and
Germany, decreases the blood supply in the area of the
placenta in pregnant women using these drugs. This may
result in miscarriage during the first trimester of pregnancy,
and placental abruption, intrauterine death and premature
birth in the third trimester. In addition, retarded foetal growth
and reduced head circumference were also observed. While
during the first two years of the child no further teratogenic
effects (1) were described, some studies found an increased
incidence of sudden infant deaths and certain behavioural
disorders.
Results of research conducted in Germany and Austria
indicate that the teratogenic effects of opioids are fewer
than, for example, those of alcohol or tobacco. Anomalies
during pregnancy and at birth include insufficient foetal
growth and intrauterine development of the bones,
intrauterine death, premature birth, anomalies in
spontaneous movements, and neonatal withdrawal
syndrome. One study in Vienna found prenatal dystrophy
and microcephaly in 21% and 14%, respectively, of
newborns of women who used heroin during their
pregnancies. During the first year of life, elevated risks of
sudden infant death and delayed statomotoric development
have been observed. In some children, microcephaly at birth
remained later on in life, resulting in mild cognitive
impairment. A range of eye problems, including strabismus,
have been reported by studies in the United Kingdom
among children who had been exposed to opioids in the
womb.
Injecting drug users have a higher than average prevalence
of blood-borne infectious diseases, and these can be
transmitted to the fetus (Gyarmathy et al., 2009). The most
common blood-borne infection among injecting drug users is
hepatitis C, the transmission of which during birth varies
depending on a number of factors. Available evidence
suggests that mother-to-child transmission of the hepatitis C
virus (HCV) occurs only during pregnancy and birth, but not
through breastfeeding. A systematic review of worldwide
transmission rates found that transmission of HCV from
mother to child depends largely on the presence in the
mother’s blood of viral RNA and whether the mother is
co-infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)
(Thomas et al., 1998). Among those who are uninfected with
HIV, the probability of transmission is 1–3% among HCV
RNA-negative and 4–6% among HCV RNA-positive women.
Among those infected with both HCV and HIV, the
probability of HCV transmission can be as high as 41%, and
that of HIV is also high.
Responses to drug use among pregnant
women
Interventions involving pregnant drug users include
substance use treatment and antenatal and postnatal
programmes. Substitution treatment for drug use during
pregnancy, however, is available only for opioid users, with
the aim to stabilise the users’ lifestyle and encourage them to
(1) Effects that cause developmental malformations in the foetus or later on in the life of the newborn.
9
EMCDDA 2012 Selected issue
use antenatal and obstetric services. Antenatal care reduces
the complications of pregnancy and birth – especially those
related to neonatal withdrawal – and decreases the
probability of birth defects.
Drug treatment
Many opioid users want to cease using the drug when they
find out that they are pregnant, but opioid withdrawal is a
high-risk option because a return to heroin use during
pregnancy can result in poorer obstetric outcomes, and
severe opioid withdrawal symptoms may induce spontaneous
abortion in the first trimester of pregnancy, or premature
labour in the third trimester (WHO, 2009). Therefore,
opioid-dependent pregnant women are encouraged to start
opioid substitution treatment and those who are already
receiving this treatment are advised to continue.
Guidelines and quality assurance of services for
pregnant drug users
trimester, to prevent birth defects and miscarriage, and the third
trimester to prevent premature birth.
Substitution treatment combined with social work and addiction
counselling is the standard practice for treatment of heroin use
during pregnancy (Mactier, 2011). Methadone is the most
commonly available and prescribed opioid substitution
medication in Europe, although, in countries where they are
available, buprenorphine and slow-release oral morphine may
also be prescribed. In a number of countries methadone is
reported as the primary substitution medication (e.g. Germany,
Ireland, Latvia, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom), whereas
in some others buprenorphine is the first-choice medication
(e.g. Estonia, Norway). In Germany, in addition to the
substitution medications commonly prescribed for opioid-using
pregnant women, treatment with diamorphine is also available
– though only for high-risk individuals, under strictly controlled
circumstances.
Guidelines for services for pregnant drug users and their
newborn were reported by eight countries, while one country
(Portugal) reported that guidelines are being developed. The
majority of these guidelines address substitution treatment. In
Germany, Ireland, Romania and the United Kingdom, guidance
is provided within the general framework for substitution
treatment, with pregnant women as a specific subgroup, while
Hungary, Norway and Sweden have developed special
guidelines.
Recommendations follow international standards, and in some
countries pregnant women receive priority in treatment entry.
Treatment protocols for opioid-using pregnant women, however,
may vary by country. In many countries, substitution treatment is
encouraged at any time during the pregnancy, while
detoxification is strongly discouraged; especially during the first
10
A drug liaison midwife service was initiated in 1999 in each
of Dublin’s three maternity hospitals to ensure that pregnant
opioid users engage in antenatal and drug services, and
that they are stabilised on methadone. A preliminary
assessment allows immediate admission to treatment. The
mainstay of treatment is opioid substitution with methadone:
stabilisation of drug use is emphasised, and women are
encouraged to remain on oral methadone throughout their
pregnancy. The option to detoxify after the first trimester
exists, but women are not pressured to reduce dose or to
detoxify. Those who had difficulties stabilising are offered
inpatient admission to a specialist drug dependency unit. A
fast-track system to admit pregnant women into treatment is
provided in the United Kingdom, where substitute
prescribing can ‘occur at any time in pregnancy’ as it is less
risky than continued drug use.
Three countries (Ireland, the Netherlands, Romania) reported
quality assurance documents addressing neonatal abstinence
syndrome. In the Netherlands, two specific protocols are
available concerning diagnostics, medical treatment, support
and multidisciplinary treatment or care of both child and
parents. In Ireland, the Irish Prison Service’s healthcare
standards provide guidance on medical treatment,
breastfeeding and psychosocial support. Finally, in Romania,
within the general framework of clinical guidelines for opioid
substitution treatment, recommendations are provided on
treatment choices and on breastfeeding for infants with
neonatal abstinence syndrome.
Neonatal withdrawal among newborns of
women in substitution treatment
While methadone is the most commonly prescribed
substitution medication in Europe, its side-effects commonly
include neonatal withdrawal. In a study among mothers
who received methadone at delivery, neonatal abstinence
syndrome occurred in 28% of infants delivered to women
receiving low doses (5–30 mg), rising to 43% for those on
medium doses (31–50 mg) and 71% for high doses
(51–95 mg) (Scully et al., 2004). Other studies have
confirmed the link between maternal methadone exposure
and the incidence of neonatal abstinence syndrome among
newborns (Binder and Vavrinkova, 2008; Cleary et al.,
2011). Given the high rates of neonatal abstinence
syndrome among the newborns of women receiving
methadone while pregnant, other substitution treatments are
of great interest. In a study in which pregnant opioid users
received oral methadone, buprenorphine or slow-release
morphine, 40% of all newborns did not require treatment
for neonatal withdrawal because they showed no or only
mild symptoms (Ebner et al., 2007). However, 79% of
newborns whose mother received buprenorphine,
compared with 32% in the methadone group and 18% in
the morphine group, did not need neonatal abstinence
syndrome treatment. Another study also found that babies
who were exposed to buprenorphine in the womb had
shorter hospital stays and shorter durations of treatment for
neonatal abstinence syndrome, with significantly smaller
doses of morphine, than babies who were exposed to
methadone before birth (Jones et al., 2010). While more
research is needed to confirm these results, many authors
recommend treating opioid-dependent pregnant women
with buprenorphine instead of methadone (Binder and
Vavrinkova, 2008; Kakko et al., 2008).
Multidisciplinary comprehensive antenatal and
postnatal programmes
Several countries reported multidisciplinary comprehensive
care programmes (2). Doctors, psychologists and social
workers follow up drug-using women and their children from
early pregnancy into childhood to ensure the well-being and
healthy development of the mother and the child. The family
outpatient centre of Hvidovre Hospital in Denmark is a
specialised unit for pregnant women who use or have used
drugs and families with drug problems (where, for example,
the father or family members other than the mother use
drugs). Children born to these mothers are followed up with
comprehensive medical and psychological care until they
reach school age. Based on this model, the Danish
government has established and funded family outpatient
centres throughout the country to help pregnant drug users
and children from birth up to school age who were exposed
to drugs in the womb. The Danish focal point reported that
the occurrence of pregnancy and birth complications and
birth defects among drug-using pregnant clients decreased
considerably in the country as a result of comprehensive
antenatal and postnatal care programmes.
Some of these care services, such as Benniena in Malta,
grew over a decade from a consulting service for pregnant
drug users to a comprehensive centre for families affected by
drug use. Malta responded to the increasing number of
pregnant drug users with the creation of a working
committee on ‘substance abuse mothers’, composed of a
multidisciplinary panel including social workers,
paediatricians, midwives from all obstetrics wards, paediatric
nursing officers, antenatal midwives and medical doctors.
The remit of the working committee is to follow mothers-to-be
who have substance use problems and to ensure that drastic
measures, such as care/court orders, can be avoided, and
the child is placed within the family of birth if possible.
The HAL (‘drugs, alcohol and pharmaceuticals’) services in
Finland form a multiprofessional treatment model, whereby a
network of maternity outpatient clinics – covering the entire
country – provides psychosocial approaches with
comprehensive medical care. Two-thirds of HAL clients are
referred from maternity clinics and the rest from substanceuse or other services, such as emergency outpatient clinics.
All university hospitals have HAL services, which treat a total
of about 400 substance-using mothers each year, providing
pregnancy monitoring (including repeated alcohol and drug
tests and laboratory tests relevant for at-risk groups, such as
hepatitis B, hepatitis C and HIV), psychiatric and
psychological assistance, and paediatric assistance.
Children born in the HAL system are followed up regularly
with health appointments and visits and by child welfare
services until they reach school age. Low-threshold agencies
called ‘family ambulatories’ have been established in
Norway based on a Danish model, providing – in
collaboration with postnatal wards, mental healthcare
services and various municipal agencies – preventative
health assistance to pregnant substance users and follow-ups
of their children until they reach school age.
The ‘addictology mobile team’ of the Port Royal-Cochin
hospital group in Paris, France, aims to help pregnant drug
(2) In addition to the examples presented in this section, the provision of multidisciplinary comprehensive care was also reported by Belgium, Luxembourg and
the United Kingdom.
11
Prevention of vertical infection among newborns
of infected mothers
Compared with HIV infection, no effective and safe method
exists to prevent HCV infection from being passed on from
the mother to her newborn, although anti-HIV therapy in coinfected women has been shown to somewhat reduce the
transmission probability of both viruses (Gyarmathy et al.,
2009). Among women infected with HIV only, the
transmission through breast milk, during pregnancy and
during birth can be reduced to less than 1% with early
diagnosis and effective treatment of the mother. The
mother-to-child transmission of hepatitis B virus (HBV),
another infection common among drug users, can be
prevented by a combination of anti-HBV immunoglobulin
and a series of HBV vaccines. There are also indications
that sexually transmitted bacterial infections, such as
chlamydia, syphilis and gonorrhoea, can be successfully
treated with antibiotics, and this treatment also prevents
vertical transmission.
users to gain or regain parenting abilities. The team, which
provides assistance during pregnancy and child birth, and
in the postpartum period, consists of five professionals: a
psychiatrist and a general practitioner (both specialised in
drug addiction), a social worker, a nurse and a midwife.
Since 2010, 35 projects to support the well-being of
drug-using mothers, mothers-to-be and their young or unborn
children have been initiated in France. The projects bring
together specialised drug treatment centres, mainstream
housing and social reinsertion facilities and low-threshold
services, in collaboration with maternity clinics, emergency
ward and infant early sociomedical welfare system
(including psychiatry).
Several hospitals in Austria (especially in Vienna and
Innsbruck) offer a combination of antenatal and postnatal
medical, psychosocial and welfare services for this
population. After a one-year pilot project, a programme
initiated in 2010 at the University Hospital of Psychiatry in
Innsbruck consisting of scheduled examinations and
assistance by a midwife is available to pregnant women,
who receive opioid substitution treatment and additional
services by the addiction clinic. Many hospitals in Vienna
offer comprehensive care, including outreach activities to
contact women at an early stage of their pregnancy. For
example, the Comprehensive Care Project at the University
Hospital in Vienna is characterised by a multiprofessional
approach including physicians, social workers, pharmacists,
nurses and psychotherapists, providing both antenatal care
and aftercare of the children. Expectant mothers receive
12
psychiatric and psychosocial care, and maintenance therapy
with methadone, morphine or buprenorphine. Newborns
with withdrawal syndrome receive immediate treatment, and
all children are followed up until age six with regular
checkups, and receive therapy (e.g. physiotherapy or
speech therapy) when needed. The project has also
generated a wealth of longitudinal scientific information on
pregnant drug users and their developing children.
In the Netherlands, the Precaution (Voorzorg) programme
was developed based on the American Nurse Family
Partnership, a project that had been found effective in
several randomised controlled trials, and adapted to the
Dutch situation. The project follows a standardised protocol,
and targets drug-using women under the age of 25 who
have no other children, and who are at most 28 weeks
pregnant, and follows them up until the child is two years
old. During this period, participating families receive 60
home visits lasting 60–90 minutes, with a decreasing
frequency from once a week after birth to once a month at
Special concerns and populations
One particular concern is drug-using new mothers
disappearing and leaving their newborns in the hospital
soon after giving birth, often without even naming them.
The Bulgarian focal point, for example, reported this
practice, especially among young Roma drug-using
women. As a response, the non-governmental organisation
‘For Our Children’ visits the Plovdiv General Hospital for
Active Treatment – where many of these abandonment
cases have been reported – and provides emotional,
psychological and social support and counselling to
birthing women who may be at such risk. The organisation
aims to promote reintegration of babies into their biological
families, or, if that is not possible, to support alternative
families, especially those next of kin. Additional assistance
to pregnant or birthing drug-using women includes the
provision of food and items for the baby, such as nappies,
bath lotions and clothes.
A special population among pregnant drug users is those in
prison. Comprehensive antenatal services exist, for
example, in Mountjoy Prison in Dublin, Ireland, where
antenatal care including HIV testing and, if they are
infected, treatment is offered to expecting mothers. These
services collaborate closely with community organisations to
prepare the mother and her newborn for their eventual life
outside prison. Another special population is women with
HIV, an infection often related to drug injecting; in Estonia,
to prevent transmission through breast feeding, infants of
HIV-infected women have the opportunity to obtain formula
milk for free until the child reaches the age of 12 months.
the end of the project. The Red Cross Assistance in Spain
runs a follow-up programme for high-risk pregnant women,
with the goal of reducing the harmful effect of their drug
consumption on their lives and on the lives of their
newborns. In this project, pregnancy is considered an
opportunity to initiate medical follow-up and addiction
treatment, including substitution therapy, infection control or
psychiatric care, if needed.
A large variety of multidisciplinary comprehensive
programmes are available in Germany at local, regional
and national levels. The WIGWAM outreach programme in
Berlin, for example, is an interdisciplinary cooperation
available for pregnant drug users since 1987. In addition to
antenatal care, medical help related to birthing, and
addiction treatment (including inpatient treatment for
newborns with neonatal abstinence syndrome), women are
offered referrals to substitution treatment, psychosocial
assistance, home visits and welfare services. The Early
Intervention for Pregnant Women with Substance Addictions
(Fruehintervention fuer suchtmittelabhaengige Schwangere,
KIDS) was initiated in Kassel in 2007 with the objective of
reaching pregnant women who have substance addictions
as early as possible in pregnancy in order to provide
referrals to medical and social services. In Portugal, the
Integrated Project of Maternal Support provides integrated
and global care to pregnant and postpartum addicted
woman and their children, following outpatient therapeutic
modalities best suited to each situation regarding the
treatment, harm-reduction and reintegration needs of these
patients.
pregnant drug users
In terms of legislation applying to pregnant users, or to
children before birth, it can be seen that in some Member
States pregnancy is one criterion that may trigger eligibility
or facilitate an application for opioid substitution
treatment (3). Treatment is based on the mother’s consent;
Finland and Sweden reported that it was difficult legally to
protect a fetus, for example by compelling the mother to
submit to care, as rights started at birth, and the right of the
mother to self-determination would be violated, though in
both countries there have recently been proposals to change
this. In the Netherlands, coercive treatment in the form of a
prenatal supervision order is possible once a pregnancy has
attained 24 weeks. It is also possible to enforce psychiatric
hospital admission for pregnant drug users, but this is
seldom applied, as that law was designed to address mental
health issues. However, one of the key legal issues with this
topic is the clashes of laws and/or perceptions of them:
jeopardising the well-being of the child by lifestyle conflicts
with the right of a parent to raise children. While a mother
may have the right to protection or assistance, and the
examples mentioned above show how she may be
encouraged to take it, she may also fear applying for it if
there is a risk that her child would be taken away, and may
even hide or deny her pregnancy because of this; this was
reported as a known concern by Germany, Hungary, the
Netherlands and Sweden.
While various countries establish obligations to report
matters that concern child welfare, it was not clear how
many would extend this obligation to concern for the
welfare of an unborn child. Sweden reported that the
obligation did not apply to unborn children, whereas in
Finland, since March 2010, an anticipatory child welfare
notification must be submitted when there is reasonable
cause to suspect that an unborn child will need child welfare
support measures immediately after birth. In Denmark,
concerns about the welfare of unborn children must also be
reported, and the obligation to report child abuse applies to
all citizens regardless of their relationship to the child. In the
United Kingdom (England and Wales), there are no
mandatory reporting obligations, but professionals and local
authorities have a duty to report if an unborn baby or a
child is at risk of significant harm. In most countries,
obligations to report (or act on) suspicions of a child ‘in
trouble’ are placed mainly on professionals, for example
members of the social service system (Slovenia), members of
the child risk-warning system (Hungary) and those who work
with children (Sweden). Sweden also reported that the
Prisons and Probation Service are obliged to report if they
suspect that a child is being mistreated. In Germany, such
an obligation on professionals to report has been noted to
clash with physicians’ confidentiality obligations, though a
new law – the ‘Bundeskinderschutzgesetz’, which came into
effect on 1 January 2012 – aims to lay down a standard to
address this.
In Poland, if the behaviour of the drug-dependent parent
results in harm to the child’s health, the child has a right to
compensation under the Civil Code, even if the actions
occurred during the mother’s pregnancy.
(3) See the EMCDDA website for information on treatment regimes in European countries.
13
Drug users living with children
No precise information is available on how many drug users
live with children in Europe. The only data that are available
concern drug users entering treatment. This population,
however, is only a partial representation of all drug users
who live with children, and not all countries in Europe collect
this information. The latest available data on those entering
treatment for drug use problems in 26 European countries
show that about one in ten clients (ranging between 3% and
17%) entering treatment in 2010 lived with children (alone
or with a partner, see Figure 2). Overall, 5% of all treatment
entrants (or 40% of those who reported living with children)
were single parents; on average, women were four times
more likely than men to be single parents.
Figure 2: Percentage of all reported clients entering treatment for
drug problems living with children
Percentage living
with children
>14
10<14
8<10
<8
No information
NB:Data are for 2010 or most recent year available. Data for Poland
refer to data from a pilot study; data for the United Kingdom come
from its 2011 National report and refer only to England. For more
information, see Table TDI-14 in the 2012 statistical bulletin.
Sources:Reitox national focal points.
14
Risks related to drug use in the family
Drug use is often a burden not just on the user, but also on
other family members, including spouses, parents, siblings
and children (Copello et al., 2005). Dependent children are
especially affected – albeit differently at different ages – by
a parent’s drug problem, since parents’ ability to rear,
protect and care for their children, attend to their health,
feed them and financially support them may be greatly
diminished by their drug use. Furthermore, being
preoccupied about drug supplies can compromise parents’
abilities to be consistent with their parenting and emotionally
responsive to their children’s needs (Barnard and
McKeganey, 2004). Drug use problems in families, however,
express themselves in a range of ways, varying in intensity
and duration, and children will exhibit different degrees of
vulnerability and capabilities of tackling the stresses to
which they are exposed (Velleman and Templeton, 2007).
Below is a summary based on reports by national focal
points, which reported an array of studies describing the
potential harms that drug use may have on families.
Physical and mental health and other outcomes for the
children are the results of a balance between risk and
protective factors that operate and interact with each other
at the level of the parent, the child and the environment. Risk
factors may include genetic and biochemical factors,
parenting, family coping styles, and violence within the
family and in the surrounding environment. Protective
factors, such as high levels of life skills, or attention, care
and social support by another parent, family member, or
social network, counteract the negative effect of risk factors.
Based on the above, a model was developed by Hosman et
al. (2009) showing the interconnection of risk and protective
factors as they relate to mental health outcomes in general.
While this model was not developed for drug use
specifically, it can serve as a point of departure for the
development and organisation of preventative and treatment
interventions of problems in children of parents with a drug
use problem, a psychiatric disorder or both.
Figure 3: A developmental model of trans-generational transmission of psychopathology
Parent
Child
Vulnerability and resilience
Risk and protective
factors of maternal
depression
temperamental features
stress reactivity
age (timing), gender
Genetic transfer
Mentally ill parent
disorder, impairment
chronicity
comorbid disorders
coping skills, self-esteem
parenting competence
Pregnancy
stress, smoking,
premature delivery
Parent-child interaction
Family context
marital discord, divorce
violence, life events,
low income, poverty
Other parent
absent or present
positive care
parenting competence
knowledge disorder partner
psychiatric disorder
Family
life span development
insecure attachment
cognitive and social skills
knowledge disorder, self-blame
self-esteem, parentification
P insensitive responsiveness
hostility, rejection
low involvement
inadequate parenting
model behaviour
abuse, neglect
Child outcomes
healthy development
stress
coping
support
problem behaviour
psychopathology
social outcomes
C response, imitation
problem behaviour
Social network and professional care
family, neighbours, friends, school, professionals
social support, social isolation, stigmatisation
availability, quality professional care
Social environment
Source: Adapted from Hosman et al. (2009).
When present in a family setting, addiction problems are
often not restricted to one drug-using parent, but may
involve both parents or may span generations. Studies
reported by the national focal point in Germany have
found that, while alcohol dependence usually afflicts only
one parent in a family, problem drug users
disproportionately often have partners who are also
dependent on drugs. Although parents may disapprove of
their own drug use and discourage their children from
using drugs, an Irish study found that they are usually not
successful in transmitting these values to their children. This
is demonstrated by statistics in, for example, Norway,
where over half of drug users in treatment reported parents
with a serious alcohol or drug problem – although this
figure may be overstated given the nature of the study
population. In addition, a study reported by the Danish
national focal point has recently found that about a third of
children who grew up with substance-using parents had
substance use problems later in life. This study suggested
that, in addition to the environment, genetic factors may
also play a role.
Parenting problems are among those that affect children the
most. Studies described in the German National report
found that, compared with non-drug using parents, drugdependent parents are more prone to neglecting their
children, and therefore children in families with addiction
problems often need to assume parental responsibilities and
tasks, such as running the household and taking care of
younger siblings. The interaction between a drug-dependent
parent and his or her child is often disturbed: studies from
the Netherlands indicate that children are often neglected or
abused, or they have low engagement with their parents.
One major parenting deficiency reported by the Irish focal
point is related to the ability and consistency of setting limits:
at times parents use unwarranted discipline, while at other
times they are overly permissive. This imbalance in the
families places a large amount of stress on the children,
especially if the mother is the one affected by the drug
problem.
An array of studies in the United Kingdom assessed how
drug-using parents function, and found that, in order to
15
ensure that their family life appears as normal as possible,
drug-using parents often resort to ‘damage limitation’
methods, whereby they try to keep their drug taking secret
from their children (Rhodes et al., 2010). They may, for
example, try to avoid sleeping during the day, hide from
their children when they have withdrawal, or hide their
drugs and paraphernalia. Despite all these efforts by the
parents, though, children are usually aware of their parents’
drug taking, and at earlier ages than the parents may think.
The children, however, keep this knowledge to themselves;
this points to the potentially high number of children who
may be in need of support services that may not be visible
to the appropriate service providers.
In Germany, the living circumstances of families affected by
drugs have been described in a number of reports. These
studies show that, compared with the general population,
problem drug users generally have lower levels of education
and occupational training, and higher levels of poverty and
unemployment. As a result, the socioeconomic circumstances
in which they bring up their children are less advantageous
than of those who do not use drugs. In addition, children in
Resilience
In psychology, resilience refers to an individual’s tendency
to cope with stress and difficulties. Resilience may help a
person ‘bounce back’ to a previous state of normal
functioning, or people may use the experience of a stressful
situation to function better in the future (Masten, 2001).
Resilience can be considered a process rather than a trait
of a person. This is an important concept to explain how, in
spite of the exposure to many risks, children growing up in
families with problems can become well-functioning adults
(Velleman and Templeton, 2006). The study of resilience
emerged about 40 years ago when some scientists
studying high-risk groups found that many children were
developing well in spite of their underprivileged
environments. Resilience is a natural tendency for some
individuals, but it can also be promoted through specific
interventions, as many studies have proven. These
interventions, for example, connect children with confidants
outside their problem families, because positive
relationships with competent adults can improve the
resilience factors, or involve children in meaningful
pastimes. Helping children become aware of their problems
increases their desire to overcome those problems.
Teachers, social workers and other adults in their
environment should create a stimulating environment where
children’s talents can evolve despite all their difficulties.
Such coaching fosters resilience and improves social
functioning (Newman, 2002).
16
families with addiction problems may experience
emergencies and stays in hospitals, the arrest of parents,
suicide attempts and deaths more frequently than other
children. The uncertain living circumstances, poor housing
conditions, poor nutrition and a socially constrained
environment have a negative impact on the physical,
psychological and social development of the child.
Conduct disorder and other psychopathological symptoms
are some of many ways how children externalise problems
in dysfunctional drug-using families. A study in Austria
among children aged three to six years old in families with
drug-using parents found that a third had signs of
developmental disorders, another third showed
psychopathological symptoms and 14% exhibited attention
deficit disorder. Of all the children, about a third are
expected to have problems at school due to their conduct
disorders, while another third will have school problems due
to their developmental disorders. Academic progress of such
children, as reported by an Irish study, may be further
hindered by poor attendance and low levels of parental
involvement. According to a Danish study, one in ten of the
children who live with parents with substance use problems
are diagnosed with mental disorders and two in five have
physical or mental health problems.
Children of drug-using parents, Ireland further reports, may
live under circumstances where their vulnerability is difficult
to detect; for example, young carers looking after parents
with drug or alcohol addictions. In such cases, families do
not want people to know the circumstances within which a
child acts as caretaker; they may fear that the child will be
taken away by social services. In Austria, for example, a
study found that in families affected by drug use a third of
the children were moved to foster parents at a very early
stage, another third remained with their mothers at first and
were transferred to another caregiver within the first few
years of infancy, and a third stayed with their mothers.
Polydrug-using mothers were more likely to have their
children taken away. While living with foster parents may
seem to be favourable for the positive development of
children, the stabilisation of the biological family through
adequate treatment, care and support, and the increase of
social network ties with non-drug using friends and
extended family are always the best solution for both
children and parents.
Responses targeting drug-using parents
An array of interventions is available for drug-using parents,
ranging from addiction treatment and integration of their
children in the biological families; through provision of or
referral to care services, psychosocial support, prevention
The Exchange on Drug Demand Reduction
Action (EDDRA)
The Exchange on Drug Demand Reduction Action (EDDRA)
is an online inventory of projects collected by the Reitox
national focal points. It provides a broad overview of
evaluated interventions in Europe. Some of these projects
addressing pregnant women, children and drug-using
parents are described in the response sections of the
present publication. The EDDRA collection is available at
the Best practice portal.
interventions and empowerment; to skills building. These
types of interventions are often offered by comprehensive
prevention programmes, while smaller programmes may
specialise only in one type of response. The examples
mentioned below are programmes reported by the national
focal points, and may not be an exhaustive list of those that
run in various EU countries.
Integration of children in their biological families
Many drug-using parents shy away from seeking treatment
or care, because they fear that their children may be taken
away from them. While at times these fears may be well
founded, in the majority of cases authorities support
drug-using parents in their efforts to seek care and treatment
in order that children can stay with their biological parents
in an improved, healthier environment. However, even when
children are taken from their drug-using parents, they are
often placed in families of close kin. For example, the wide
range of social services provided by the Bulgarian
foundation ‘For Our Children’ includes services promoting
the reintegration of babies and children into their biological
families, and there is an emphasis on extended families
when placement in foster families or care is necessary. One
of the founding principles of the Lichtblick project in
Frankfurt, Germany, is that it is in the best interest of the
children to avoid being removed from the custody of their
biological parents. The comprehensive services provided by
the project aim to empower drug-using parents to create a
healthy physical and mental environment for their children.
In January 2008, a pilot family drug and alcohol court
(FDAC) was set up in London to address the specific needs
of drug-using parents and thus improve outcomes for their
children (Harwin et al., 2011). It was the first court of its kind
in England and Wales, and consisted of a rehabilitation
programme for drug-using parents whose children are
subject to care proceedings, and was led by a judge. In the
final evaluation report, it was shown that 39% of children in
areas that were served by the FDAC stayed with the family,
in comparison with 21% of children in families who were
subject to normal care proceedings. There was also a
positive difference reported in the proportion of mothers
who had stopped substance misuse (48% compared with
39%). A greater reduction in substance use was also
reported among fathers in the evaluation (39% of those in
the FDAC group compared with one of the 19 fathers in the
other group).
The Health Service Executive (HSE) in Ireland has developed
a pilot project with a family-oriented approach that is
expected to reduce the number of children who need to
leave their families to be cared for in alternative forms of
care. In addition, the HSE provides a full range of support
services to both parents and children, including therapeutic
work, parent education programmes, home-based parent
and family support programmes, child development and
education interventions, youth work and community
development. The evaluation of the Families First project in
north-east England showed that parents at risk of losing their
children can successfully change their lives such that the
children can remain safely in the family home. The
availability of kinship care, usually provided by
grandparents, was an important factor in preventing
children from being taken into care (Templeton, 2011).
Family-based residential treatment programmes
Inpatient residential treatment programmes that specifically
cater to the needs of families exist in some Member States.
For example, the therapeutic community Sananim in the city
of Karlov (Czech Republic) has provided treatment to
altogether 115 dependent mothers and their 117 children
since 2001. The Belgian organisation Trempoline developed
the Kangaroo project with the objective of supporting
women in their role as mothers. During the daytime, while
mothers in this therapeutic programme are engaged in
activities (e.g. therapeutic community and social
reintegration), their children attend nursery school,
kindergarten or school classes, depending on their ages.
The inpatient treatment clinic De Lage Kamp in the
Netherlands has been serving addicted parents and their
children (up to age 12) for more than 15 years. Treatment is
offered to up to nine families at a time for the duration of 12
months on average, with detoxification during the first four
weeks. Parents participate in group sessions and receive
individual counselling, and children are in day care
engaged in educational activities and games. A highthreshold programme in Slovenia called Projekt Človek
Society houses three families (mothers or fathers and their
children) at a time. This inpatient social rehabilitation and
17
addiction treatment programme teaches parents skills
related to parenting and improving the relationship with
their children. A nationwide network of inpatient facilities in
Finland (the Federation of Mother and Child Homes and
Shelters) has been offering treatment and care to drug-using
mothers (and, to a lesser extent, fathers) and their children
since the late 1990s. Several family inpatient institutions
exist in Norway as well: a national study from 2005
showed that 93% of the children were under the age of
three years, and 25% of them were born while the mother
was already staying at the institution.
The Coolmine Therapeutic Community in Ireland is the only
residential service in the country where children of primary
school age can live on site with their mother, allowing the
mothers to receive the support they need as their children’s
personal development is strengthened through specialist
counselling and child welfare initiatives. The Federation of
The role of the family in treating drug addiction
Evidence shows that involving family members in the
treatment of their relatives affected by drug addiction is
important for at least two reasons: to alleviate the
symptoms of stress and their consequences in family
members, and to improve the effectiveness of treatment
(Orford et al., 2010). Copello and colleagues (2005)
identified three main types of family-based interventions,
and presented evidence to support the effectiveness of all
three types: those aimed at the involvement of the family to
promote the entry of the substance user into treatment;
interventions which involve the family in the treatment itself;
interventions aimed at supporting the family members.
Other reviews have shown that family-oriented interventions
also decrease behaviours and situations that facilitate
substance use, by modifying the emotional environment
linked to substance use. A review study in Germany that
assessed services aimed at drug-using parents identified a
systematic family-oriented approach as an important
conceptual element in work with families with addiction
problems. Group services (support groups, individual
counselling, case counselling, weekend seminars, crisis
intervention and parent training courses), public-relations
work (awareness of services), administration (planning of
resources) and supporting services (childcare while parents
take part in activities or family seminars) are also key
elements that contribute to the success of the programmes.
Initiating contact with help agencies is often difficult for
drug-using parents; feelings of embarrassment and shame,
and fear of losing their children were identified as major
barriers to seeking care. Outreach and referral by other
– often non-drug-related – services may help parents
overcome these barriers.
18
Mother and Child Homes and Shelters in Finland runs a
national specialised treatment system known as Pidä kiinni
(Hold tight), consisting of seven mother and child homes
around the country. To date, the Pidä kiinni homes and
service units have rehabilitated about 1 500 families. The
service reaches some 250 families annually, of which about
100 are referred to mother and child shelters and about 150
to outpatient services. In the Lithuanian public institution
TC-Laisva valia, up to 10 substance-using women may get
long-term psychological care and social rehabilitation
services together with their little children. The ‘Eltern-KindHaus’ (‘parent–child house’) in Boeddiger Berg, Germany, is
a special service where drug-using parents live together with
their children and receive advice and help regarding
child-raising questions and support in organising everyday
family life.
Provision of or referral to care services
Parents with drug problems and their children need
ongoing care. This includes follow-up by case managers of
those who are involved in prevention programmes with the
aim of providing ongoing counselling to prevent drug use
and encouraging a healthy lifestyle. Some may require
clients to return to the programme that they participated in,
while others provide home visits. Specific help offered to
clients may include crisis intervention, legal help with
issues related to drug use, and childcare while they
participate in programme activities. Obviously, not all
programmes may be comprehensive enough to offer all
services that this target population may need. They often,
therefore, provide referrals to other services, or encourage
service utilisation.
The Kiddo Project in Belgium helps parents become aware
of how their current or past drug problems may affect their
children, informs them about other services available and
encourages them to make use of those services. In addition
to referring mothers to facilities in the area of child and
youth welfare services, the ‘Liliput – Mutter + Kind’ service
offers individual counselling to mothers and children,
childcare and leisure time activities in Nürnberg, Germany.
In Kassel, Germany, KIDS reaches out to expectant drug
users and mothers with drug problems and connects them
with social and health services. Päiväperho (Butterfly) in
Finland links substance-using pregnant women and mothers
of small children with child welfare services, substance use
services, maternity clinics and family counselling clinics, in
addition to providing low-threshold services.
Since 2000, a crisis intervention service called Option 2 has
been running in Cardiff and the Vale of Glamorgan, Wales.
Staff work intensively with two or three families for up to 30
hours a week over a four-week period, with follow-up visits
at one, six and twelve months post intervention. Booster
sessions are available to respond to a crisis or to help
parents reinforce their coping skills. Parents are asked to
develop goals to reduce risks to their children and to identify
behavioural changes which will prevent their child from
being taken into care by social services. Examples of goals
include drug or alcohol abstinence; improved family
relations; developing improved routines for children; dealing
with domestic violence; and managing children’s behaviour.
Several similar interventions which target families with
substance use problems using the Option 2 model have
been developed across the United Kingdom, but provision is
not provided on a national basis.
A multidisciplinary social work team, including community
care and probation professionals, is available at the Drug
Treatment Centre Board in Dublin, Ireland, focusing on
family support (including child welfare), advocacy, group
work, writing reports and attending inter-agency meetings.
A children’s playroom provides stimulation and a safe and
supportive child-centred setting for children aged between 1
and 14 years, who accompany their parents or guardians to
the clinic. They also offer advice and support to parents who
may have childcare concerns. The Ballyfermot Advance
Project in Ireland subsidises childcare costs in order to
facilitate treatment access to drug-using parents.
Social work at police stations is an important element of
responses in Finland. It involves responding to situations that
emerge in the course of police work involving children,
young offenders, people experiencing family and domestic
violence, mental health patients, drug users and other
people undergoing acute crises.
Psychosocial support
Several activities provide psychosocial support for
recovering drug-using parents. Psychotherapy, psychosocial
care, and support groups with activities to learn healthy
expression of emotions are aimed at minimising the
complications related to drug use. Several programmes offer
services facilitating social reintegration and rehabilitation.
The Welsh programme Integrated Family Support Services is
a multiagency service which provides targeted support to
families where there are concerns regarding child welfare
and parental substance misuse (drugs, alcohol or both). It is
a family-centred approach to services which provides early
intervention in addition to crisis management. The aim is to
provide intensive support to improve parenting capacity as
well as social service intervention and to help bridge the
gaps between child and adult services by protecting
vulnerable children, while at the same time helping parents
to develop new skills. Four ‘pioneer’ areas in Wales
adopted the scheme in late 2010, and it is reported that
some early successes in preventing children being taken into
care have been observed. These areas were to be evaluated
in 2011, and following this it is expected that the programme
will be rolled out nationally. The evaluation is due for
publication in 2012/13.
An array of services in Germany provides psychosocial
support to drug-using parents and their children.
Regenbogen, an inpatient aftercare programme in Germany,
provides abstinence-based support, counselling and
assistance to parents with substance use problems. The
HiKiDra project in Kiel offers comprehensive social
counselling for parents, and support groups not only for
mothers, but also for pregnant women, children and
adolescents. The ‘Bella Donna’ drug-counselling office has
been offering services to women and girls in Essen since
1992. Its training programme MUT! helps mothers who use
drugs or are in substitution treatment, and their children, by
providing support, suggestions and practical help in the
everyday chores of raising children. Childcare is available
while mothers attend group meetings.
Empowerment and skills building
Parents who are seeking to recover from drug addiction
benefit substantially from acquiring and strengthening skills
that enable them to forge a strong family. Building
parenting skills – including setting limits for their children,
planning and organising the household, and planning the
children’s education – are a main goal of therapeutic
programmes. These include being aware of the parent’s
addiction, learning how to deal with real-life family
situations and acquiring everyday practical skills. A key
aspect is building family coherence by planning family
leisure time and fostering the parent–child relationship.
Skills-building activities related to interpersonal skills,
communication, coping, problem solving and decision
making are also often part of therapeutic work for parents
with drug problems.
The Ana Liffey Drug Project in Ireland aims to promote and
support high-quality parenting and to enhance the quality of
life for children whose parents use drugs. SAOL is a
community-based educational and rehabilitation day
programme for women in treatment for drug addiction. It
provides a full-time childcare facility and early education
programme for their children: SAOL Beag (Little SAOL)
Children’s Centre. Using an individualised curriculum and
approach to work with the children, the programme seeks to
identify each child’s interests, strengths and learning goals
19
and to plan activities and learning experiences for the child.
An integral part of this service is to work in partnership with
the parents. Another key element is the relationship the
children have with the adults who work with them: the staff
are qualified and experienced in dealing with children and
aim to form strong, caring relationships with the children.
A special programme in Denmark called ‘Dag og
Døgncenteret’ (the Day Care and Inpatient Centre) is an
inpatient programme that places the mother (or parents) and
the child together in a foster family under special terms and
conditions. In this system, the parents are not allowed to take
the child with them if they unexpectedly leave the foster
family or experience recurrence of their drug use. In
Denmark, other inpatient institutions exist that do not
specifically target drug-using parents with children, but are
aimed to help families with any psychosocial problem or a
risk of neglect. The ‘1-2-3 Lass!’ (1-2-3 Go) project in
Luxembourg targets pregnant women and mothers with
children under two years of age. It started as a pilot project
in 2007 as a collaboration between the ‘service parentalité’
and the National Drug Addiction Prevention Centre, with the
aim to strengthen and improve the parenting skills of
participants.
The Polish government sponsored a prevention programme
in 2010 entitled ‘New Beginning’, targeting drug-dependent
mothers and pregnant women. The programme featured
support groups and parenting classes. The aims were to
improve the participants’ knowledge and skills regarding
conflict solving, coping, positive thinking and leisure time
activities; to manage the child’s development; to improve the
parent–child relationship; and to promote parenting skills.
Besides psychological and health matters, some classes
were devoted to legal issues.
Internet-based prevention interventions for
drug-using parents
Several programmes use alternative means, such as email,
phone or the Internet, to reach families affected by drug
use. An Internet-based intervention called www.
kopopouders.nl (‘cheer up, parents’), based in the
Netherlands, is the online version of a face-to-face course.
The contents are designed to support parents with a
psychiatric disorder or addiction problem on issues related
to the upbringing of children. Professionals from mental
health institutes coach the parents in online group courses,
and through chat and email. In 2009, the site reached
almost 40 000 parents. A pre–post evaluation showed a
significant decrease in parenting problems among
participants.
20
Responses targeting drug users’ children
Children in families affected by drug use may have different
needs, based on a variety of factors. For example, children
who have drug-using parents, but who do not show signs of
maladjustment or developmental difficulties, may need
different interventions from those children whose behavioural
problems are a reaction to the parent’s drug problems. On
the other hand, the drug use habits of the parents may be
hidden from outsiders, with the result that the potential
maladjustment of the child may not be responded to
appropriately. Despite the potential difficulties concerning
identifying children who are raised in families affected by
drug use, an array of interventions is available for them,
ranging from integration of children in their biological
families, through provision of care services, psychosocial
support and prevention interventions, to skills building.
Care services
In some European countries, services targeting children of
drug users are historically part of the welfare services. For
example, in Prague, the Centre for Children, Young People,
and the Family has been serving families affected by alcohol
and drug use since 1967. Their programmes for children
include special counselling and child welfare services with
the aim of providing children with a safe space where they
can strengthen their personal development. The centre has
also provided research data for studies assessing the effects
of parents’ alcohol use on children.
In Portugal, the Centre of Integrated Responses performs the
assessment and screening of children in families with
addiction- or alcohol-related problems, youth at risk or
young people with alcohol or drug problems. In 2010,
3 920 adolescents were attended to, and 20 referrals and
750 appointments of family support were made.
Appointments, often through partnerships with other entities,
are also available to parents, teachers and members of the
educational community.
Often care services for children are not specialised in drug
use, but cater to the needs of families with a range of mental
health problems. The ‘Squeak Says the Mouse’ project in the
Netherlands, for example, offers support in low-economicstatus neighbourhoods for children between the ages of four
and eight who have a parent with a psychosocial, mental
health or substance use problem. The aim is to
counterbalance the combination of parental factors and the
high-risk environment and keep the children from developing
problems similar to those of their parents. A pre–post
evaluation showed a significant decrease in emotional
problems and a significant increase in positive social
behaviours among participating children. Two projects in
Austria (the Jojo project in Salzburg and KIPKE in St Pölten)
target children of parents with psychiatric illnesses. Children
participate in individual and group sessions where they
learn skills that help them cope with their parents’ illness.
only those related to drug use. Adapted versions of
Strengthening families have been implemented in at least 11
European countries (4). A German project called ‘Jonathan’
has been available for children and youth from families with
addiction problems in Erfurt since 2006. Services include
informing different age groups about specific topics relating
Psychosocial support
In Belgium, the project ‘La Brique’ implemented by the AVAT
institution is a place where children aged 12–17 who have
drug-using parents can receive psychosocial support and
express their feelings in a creative way. In Germany, the
national model project ‘Trampolin’ focuses on children in
families with addiction problems and seeks to strengthen
their self-image and ability to solve problems. For example,
specific group activities aim to inform participants about
drugs and alcohol, remove taboos on the subject of
addiction and teach strategies that help them cope with
stress. The project is supported by the German Centre for
Addiction Problems of Children and Youth (Deutsches
Zentrum fuer Suchtfragen des Kindes- und Jugendalters) and
the German Institute for Research on Addiction and
Prevention (Deutsches Institut fuer Sucht- und
Praeventionsforschung), and is carried out at sites in all 16
German Laender. The KiSEL project in Loerrach focuses
mainly on children and adolescents from families with
addiction problems, but it also provides parenting support
counselling services for parents. In the Netherlands,
face-to-face support groups for children of parents with a
psychiatric disorder and children of addicted parents aim to
increase the social well-being of the children by increasing
their resilience, thereby diminishing their likelihood of
developing psychopathology. An effectiveness study is
currently ongoing in the age group 8–12 years. A large
number of municipalities in Sweden have support groups for
children whose parents have substance use problems.
During these group activities, children share their
experiences with others who live under similar
circumstances. No evaluations, however, have assessed the
effectiveness of these support groups in Sweden.
Empowerment and skills building
‘Strengthening families’ is a family-based intervention,
developed in the United States two decades ago, that
targets parents with a drug or alcohol problem and their
children. The intervention aims to increase the social
capacities, communication skills and self-confidence of
participating children, and addresses several problems, not
Internet-based interventions for children of
drug-using parents
Several European countries reported on Internet-based
responses for children with drug-using parents, taking
advantage of the computer literacy of younger generations
to reach the target group. The ‘Kidkit‘ project in Germany is
a low-threshold, Internet-based service available since
2002 for children and adolescents who live in families with
addiction problems and/or experience domestic violence,
providing information about topics such as ‘addiction and
family’ and ‘violence and family’. The project also offers
free and anonymous online counselling.
The Netherlands-based Kopstoring is an interactive website
for adolescents and young adults aged 16–25 who live
with drug-using parents. The site, which receives about
10 000 unique visitors each month, includes information
pages, a panel discussion, email services and a chat box,
and aims to strengthen the coping skills of adolescents and
young adults in order to prevent and alleviate behavioural
and psychological problems. A process evaluation showed
significant decreases in parentification – whereby a child is
obliged to act as parent to their own parent – and in
negative feelings towards the home situation. The website is
currently ongoing a randomised controlled evaluation and
a cost-effectiveness assessment. Another Dutch site,
Survivalkid is a members-only site for youngsters aged
12–24 who have parents or siblings with a psychiatric
disorder or substance use problem. The site provides
information on psychiatric disorders and addiction, has a
chat function with peers, and includes a chat and email
facility with a ‘survival coach’.
The DrugLijn project in Belgium provides general information
on addiction, including suggestions to answer the question
‘What to do if your parent(s) use drugs?’ (*). In Sweden, the
Swedish Council for Information on Alcohol and Other Drugs
has developed a web-based self-help programme,
Drugsmart, for children of substance-using parents. The
programme will be evaluated by researchers at the
organisation STAD (Stockholm Prevents Alcohol and Drugs).
(*) Websites dealing with the issue of drug-using parents may exist in
other countries as well.
(4) Germany, Greece, Ireland, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Norway.
21
to addiction problems, leisure time activities, pedagogical
assistance and social skills development. Other services
have also been available since 2011, including consultation
days for parents, children and institutions. At times, help is
provided not only to families affected by drug use, but also
to families with a range of other mental health problems.
drug-using parents and their children
Legal framework at international level
The main international laws governing illicit drugs are the
UN Conventions of 1961, 1971 and 1988. The first two
make no mention of young people. The preamble of the
1988 Convention Against Illicit Traffic in Drugs expresses
deep concern for the fact that children are used as a
consumer market and for drug distribution, and in Article
3(5) it mentions the victimisation of minors or distribution
near schoolchildren, for example, as aggravating supply
offences. Nevertheless, there is no express mention of
children of drug users.
However, the following year (in November 1989) the UN
Convention on the Rights of the Child was signed. Article 33
states:
States Parties shall take all appropriate measures,
including legislative, administrative, social and
educational measures, to protect children from the illicit
use of narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances as
defined in the relevant international treaties, and to
prevent the use of children in the illicit production and
trafficking of such substances.
The preamble states that the child ‘needs special safeguards
and care, including appropriate legal protection before as
well as after birth’. As there is no mention of from whose
illicit drug use the child should be protected, this has been
interpreted as meaning that states should protect children
from drug use within the family (Barrett and Veerman, 2012).
It may be read together with Article 24, which gives the
right to antenatal and postnatal care, and therefore may
include substitution treatment for opioid-dependent people,
and may also be considered as supporting parenting skills.
Legal framework at European level
At the European level, there is again no specific law
applying to the children of drug users. Nevertheless, the
issue of removing children from families may be governed
by the right to family life. Article 8 of the European
Convention on Human Rights states:
22
1. Everyone has the right to respect for his private and
family life, his home and his correspondence.
2. There shall be no interference by a public authority
with the exercise of this right except such as is in
accordance with the law and is necessary in a
democratic society in the interests of national security,
public safety or the economic well-being of the
country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for
the protection of health or morals, or for the
protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
In interpreting this, states are allowed some discretion,
known as the margin of appreciation. This will differ
according to context but is particularly wide in the area of
child protection (Kilkelly, 2003). Nevertheless, it has been
established by the court that a family life will always include
the relationship between a mother and child, even when
there is no marriage, no cohabitation, or only potential
family life even if it has not been established (for example, if
a child was removed from a parent at birth) (Kilkelly, 2003).
As the well-being of the child is paramount, the return of the
child to the parents should always be considered; without
measures to prepare for the child’s return to his or her
parents, the implementation of a custody order may be
damaging to the child (Conrod et al., 2010). This was
reported as a basic principle in Belgium, Latvia, Slovenia
and Slovakia. In the Czech Republic, one of the objectives
of the national action plan on caring for vulnerable children
is to reduce the number of children in institutional care, while
the Irish Child Care Act, 1991, aims to avoid the use of care.
If disagreements between parents or authorities occur, the
child has a right to be informed of proceedings and to
express its opinion, according to the European Convention
on the Exercise of Children’s Rights 1996.
Legal framework at national level
Given the very specific focus of the Convention on the Rights
of the Child on illicit drug use, as it was drafted 20 years
ago, it is perhaps a sign of development of the public health
paradigm in the field of substance use that most countries
appear to address the problem in a more general frame of
harm to the child that may be caused by addiction to any
substance, including alcohol, or by belonging to a certain
‘risk group’. No country in Europe reported that drug use in
itself was a reason to remove the child from the parent.
Perhaps comparably, few countries reported that the
children of drug-using parents were a specific target group
in the national drug strategy or action plan. In Portugal,
there are several mentions in the 1999 National Strategy
and the 2005–12 National Plan. The 1999 document
identifies the difficulty of finding places in therapeutic
communities and specialist treatment programmes for
pregnant women and those with children, and requests
attention to prevention activities for the children of addicts.
These are developed in the 2005 plan, and have resulted in
guidelines for children of drug users (2010), while guidelines
for monitoring pregnant women are being drafted. The
Luxembourg National Drug Action Plan refers to the
‘parental service’, which follows judicial measures under the
Child Protection Act, as a priority 1 project that should be
further developed. In Austria, which has drug or addiction
policy papers in each of the nine provinces rather than one
national document, the children of addicted parents are
explicitly mentioned in the policy papers in four provinces as
target groups for prevention and/or treatment services (in
fact the 1999 Drug Policy Programme of Vienna points to
good results from a hospital project, indicating that this was
a focus early on). In Ireland, the National Drugs Strategy of
2001 considered childcare facilities in treatment centres,
and the new strategy of 2009–16 identified the children of
drug users as a ‘group at risk’ and called for considering
ways to address the needs of the children of problem drug
users. The current UK Drug Strategy of 2010 focuses on
early intervention for vulnerable young people, in which it
includes children of drug users; in Northern Ireland, the rate
of children on the child protection register due to parental
drug use is a key indicator in the Children Services Plan
2008–11, rather than the drug strategy. Within the wider
substance use framework, the 2011 Swedish strategy for
alcohol, narcotic drugs, doping and tobacco policy contains
an interim target for its second objective that fewer children
should be born with damage caused by those substances.
However, most countries reported that the children or
parents would be covered by more general terms in the
national drug or addiction strategy documents without
specific mention.
Besides treatment, childcare facilities may also be an issue
for drug-using parents, though there was little focus reported
on this. In 2001, the Irish National Drugs Strategy called for
consideration of how to integrate childcare facilities with
treatment and rehabilitation centres, and provision in
residential treatment settings. Four years later, it was
considered that full-time childcare facilities within an
addiction setting may lead to further stigmatisation of the
children of drug users, and that more appropriate services
should be provided.
Given the potential for conflicts between laws and
strategies, it is interesting to note calls and efforts made in
coordination in this area. In Germany, from January 2012,
the law to strengthen protection of children aims to provide
a legal foundation for binding network structures for child
protection, where conflicts have occurred in the past. The
Irish National Drugs Strategy 2009–16 called for facilitating
closer engagement between child, outreach and drug
services at a local level. The Ministry of Family in
Luxembourg set up a ‘national office of childhood’ in
December 2008. Youth care in the Netherlands is being
revised, after the multiplicity financing structures was
identified as a major barrier; there will be one financing
structure and central coordination of financing at the level of
the municipalities, committing collaboration between all
professionals. Austria reported good results in care and
support for pregnant drug users and their children, from a
service providing interdisciplinary cooperation between
hospitals. The 1999 Portuguese drug strategy declares the
importance of coordination of programmes for pregnant
addicts with maternity departments and obstetrics services.
In Sweden, the 2011 alcohol, narcotic drugs, doping and
tobacco strategy has set targets for a clearer division of
responsibilities between the principals for substance use and
dependence care. In the United Kingdom, statutory Local
Safeguarding Children Boards (Child Protection Committees
in Scotland) are made up of representatives from across key
children’s services and should ensure regular sharing of
information and local multiagency working.
23
Conclusions
Drug users who aim to stabilise their lives face several
challenges, including access to treatment, stabilisation of
their drug use, social reintegration and referral for health
problems other than drug use. Drug users who have
children, however, constitute a special subgroup, because in
addition to their concerns related to drug use in general,
they also have additional needs, such as childcare while
they are in treatment and assistance with issues related to
parenting. Furthermore, the legal protection and the right of
their children to grow up in their own family may be
threatened with the possibility that the children can be
removed if child protection services consider their
environment dangerous to their well-being. This Selected
issue gives a broad overview, based on reports by EU
Member States and Norway, on the extent of and available
responses – interventions, laws and policies – to the
problems of pregnant drug users and families that are
affected by problem drug use.
National reports indicate that legislation in Europe strives to
keep the family united rather than take away the children.
No country reported that drug use was a reason per se to
remove the child from the parent. Legislation applying to
pregnant drug users or to children before birth facilitates
eligibility to treatment in many countries. In addition to
legislation, a variety of interventions – many of them
evidence-based – have been developed in European
countries to help pregnant drug users and addicted parents
and their children. For example, the majority of treatment
interventions for pregnant women follow the evidence of
providing substitution treatment to those dependent on
opioids. Furthermore, to ensure that pregnant drug users
receive proper and timely care, some countries organise
outreach services and referral systems, and offer
multidisciplinary comprehensive programmes during and
after pregnancy, and therapeutic communities where
recovering parents and their children can remain together.
Interventions responding to the needs of drug-using parents
and their children include measures enabling the children to
stay with their biological families, family-based interventions,
provision of or referral to care services, psychosocial
support, empowerment and skills building. Internet-based
prevention programmes are also available, especially for
24
adolescents and young adults with drug-using parents, a
target group that often still lacks appropriate interventions.
Data on the prevalence of drug use among pregnant
women is not available for most European countries, so
programmes aimed at helping pregnant drug users may not
be aware of the size of the target group. In addition, it is
unknown to what extent families affected by drug use are
reached by existing programmes. National reports,
however, indicate that coverage may be small or vary
substantially by country, and that the viability of some of
these programmes may be questionable. There are several
factors that may contribute to this situation. First, a shortage
of appropriate and available interventions at organisations
that may cater for the needs of problem drug users and
their families is often combined with a lack of policy
support. Second, reaching the target group may be difficult.
For example, several countries reported that a number of
problem drug-using parents are not in treatment, and their
children therefore may not be reached by addiction care.
When in treatment, some clients may not disclose that they
are parents. It has also been reported that children of
clients in addiction care may not be targeted systematically,
and that problem drug users may shy away from contacting
such services because of their fear of stigmatisation
surrounding drug addiction and mental disorders, and their
fear of losing their children.
Those treatment services that exist may have several
impediments that prevent them from increasing their
coverage. For example, a potentially general issue
reported by Finland relates to public funding: as drug
treatment services are often dependent on funding from
local or government authorities, budget cuts resulting from
financial crisis may have negatively affected, among other
things, the functioning of interventions and services
targeting drug users with children. Diminished funding may
have led to a loss of treatment places, an insufficiency of
medications, a decrease in the variety and diversity of
services, and the eventual closure of such services – to
name just a few. As recovering from substance use and
problems related to it may be lifelong processes, securing
long-term government or other funding is an essential
attribute of prevention efforts.
In light of the above, continuous monitoring, especially
identifying the size of the target population, might be
helpful to better understand the issues, needs and potential
solutions related to drug-using pregnant women, and drug
users and their children. Identification and promotion of
exchange of best practices will support countries in setting
their goals and planning their responses. Where needed,
accessibility and coverage of treatment should be
increased, especially for pregnant drug users. Removing
barriers to seeking treatment, including lack of childcare
and fear of legal consequences, might further help this
target population. Evidence-based family interventions
should be further promoted. Appropriate interventions that
strengthen the resilience of children can also help prevent
children of drug users from becoming drug users
themselves. The variety and coverage of appropriate
preventative interventions based on such approaches still
have room for improvement, as has the evidence base for
interventions for pregnant drug users, drug-using parents
and the children of drug-using parents.
25
References
Barnard, M. and McKeganey, N. (2004), ‘The impact of
parental problem drug use on children: what is the problem
and what can be done to help?’, Addiction 99(5), pp.
552–559.
El Marroun, H., Tiemeier, H., Steegers, E. A., RoosHesselink, J. W., Jaddoe, V. W. et al. (2010), ‘A prospective
study on intrauterine cannabis exposure and fetal blood
flow’, Early Human Development 86(4), pp. 231–236.
Barrett, D. and Veerman, P. E. (2012), A commentary on the
United Nations convention on the rights of the child, Article
33: Protection from narcotic drugs and psychotropic
substances, Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden.
El Marroun, H., Hudziak, J. J., Tiemeier, H., Creemers, H.,
Steegers, E. A. et al. (2011), ‘Intrauterine cannabis exposure
leads to more aggressive behavior and attention problems
in 18-month-old girls’, Drug and Alcohol Dependence
118(2–3), pp. 470–474.
Binder, T. and Vavrinkova, B. (2008), ‘Prospective
randomised comparative study of the effect of
buprenorphine, methadone and heroin on the course of
pregnancy, birthweight of newborns, early postpartum
adaptation and course of the neonatal abstinence syndrome
(NAS) in women followed up in the outpatient department’,
Neuroendocrinology Letters 29(1), pp. 80–86.
Cleary, B. J., Donnelly, J. M., Strawbridge, J. D., Gallagher,
P. J., Fahey, T. et al. (2011), ‘Methadone and perinatal
outcomes: a retrospective cohort study’, American Journal of
Obstetrics and Gynaecology 204(2), p. 139.
Conrod, P. J., Castellanos-Ryan, N. and Strang, J. (2010),
‘Brief, personality-targeted coping skills interventions and
survival as a non-drug user over a 2-year period during
adolescence’, Archives of General Psychiatry 67(1), pp.
85–93.
Copello, A. G., Velleman, R. D. and Templeton, L. J. (2005),
‘Family interventions in the treatment of alcohol and drug
problems’, Drug and Alcohol Reviews 24, pp. 369–385.
26
Friguls, B., Joya, X., Garcia-Serra, J., Gomez-Culebras, M.,
Pichini, S. et al. (2012), ‘Assessment of exposure to drugs of
abuse during pregnancy by hair analysis in a
Mediterranean island’, Addiction 107(8), pp. 1471–1479.
Gyarmathy, V. A., Giraudon, I., Hedrich, D., Montanari, L.,
Guarita, B. and Wiessing, L. (2009), ‘Drug use and
pregnancy: challenges for public health’, EuroSurveillance
14(9), pp. 33–36.
Harwin, J., Ryan, M., Tunnard, J., Alrouh, B., Matias, C. et
al. (2011), ‘The family drug & alcohol court (FDAC)
evaluation project’, Brunel University.
Hosman, C. M. H., Van Doesum, K. T. M. and Van
Santvoort, F. (2009), ‘Prevention of emotional problems and
psychiatric risks in children of parents with a mental illness in
the Netherlands: I. The scientific basis to a comprehensive
approach’, Advances in Mental Health 8(3), pp. 250–63
(available at: http://pubs.e-contentmanagement.com/toc/
jamh/8/3).
Ebner, N., Rohrmeister, K., Winklbaur, B., Baewert, A.,
Jagsch, R. et al. (2007), ‘Management of neonatal
abstinence syndrome in neonates born to opioid maintained
women’, Drug and Alcohol Dependence 87(2–3), pp.
131–138.
Jones, H. E., Kaltenbach, K., Heil, S. H., Stine, S. M., Coyle,
M. G. et al. (2010), ‘Neonatal abstinence syndrome after
methadone or buprenorphine exposure’, New England
Journal of Medicine 363(24), pp. 2320–2331.
El Marroun, H., Tiemeier, H., Steegers, E. A., Jaddoe, V. W.,
Hofman, A. et al. (2009), ‘Intrauterine cannabis exposure
affects fetal growth trajectories: the Generation R Study’,
Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent
Psychiatry 48(12), pp. 1173–1181.
Kakko, J., Heilig, M. and Sarman, I. (2008), ‘Buprenorphine
and methadone treatment of opiate dependence during
pregnancy: comparison of fetal growth and neonatal
outcomes in two consecutive case series’, Drug and Alcohol
Dependence 96(1–2), pp. 69–78.
Kilkelly, U. (2003), The right to respect for private and family
life: A guide to the implementation of Article 8 of the
European Convention on Human Rights, Council of Europe,
Strasbourg.
Mactier, H. (2011), ‘The management of heroin misuse in
pregnancy: time for a rethink?’, Archives of Disease in
Childhood – Fetal and Neonatal Edition 96(6), pp. F457–
F460.
Masten, A. S. (2001), ‘Ordinary magic: resilience processes
in development’, American Psychologist 56(3), pp. 227–238.
Newman, T. (2002), Promoting resilience: A review of
effective strategies for child care services, Centre for
Evidence-based Social Services, University of Exeter and
Barnardos.
Orford, J., Velleman, R., Copello, A., Templeton, L. and
Ibanga, A. (2010), ‘The experiences of affected family
members: a summary of two decades of qualitative
research’, Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy 17(s1), pp.
44–62.
Rhodes, T., Bernays, S. and Houmoller, K. (2010), ‘Parents
who use drugs: accounting for damage and its limitation’,
Social Science & Medicine 71(8), pp. 1489–1497.
Scottish Executive (2006), Neonatal Abstinence Syndrome.
A new intervention: A community based, structured health
visitor assessment, Scottish Executive, Edinburgh (available
at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/
Doc/146679/0038382.pdf).
Scully, M., Geoghegan, N., Corcoran, P., Tiernan, M. and
Keenan, E. (2004), ‘Specialized drug liaison midwife
services for pregnant opioid dependent women in Dublin,
Ireland’, Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 26(1), pp.
329–335.
Templeton, L. (2011), ‘Dilemmas facing grandparents with
grandchildren affected by parental substance misuse’, Drugs:
Education, Prevention and Policy 19, pp. 1–8.
Thomas, S. L., Newell, M. L., Peckham, C. S., Ades, A. E.
and Hall, A. J. (1998), ‘A review of hepatitis C virus (HCV)
vertical transmission: risks of transmission to infants born to
mothers with and without HCV viraemia or human
immunodeficiency virus infection’, International Journal of
Epidemiology 27(1), pp. 108–117.
Velleman, R. and Templeton, L. (2006), ‘Reaching out:
promoting resilience in the children of substance misusers’, in
Harbin, F. and Murphy, M. (eds), Secret lives: growing with
substance – working with children and young people
affected by familial substance misuse, Russell House, Lyme
Regis, pp. 12–27.
Velleman, R. and Templeton, L. (2007), ‘Understanding and
modifying the impact of parents’ substance misuse on
children’, Advances in Psychiatric Treatment 13(2), pp.
79–89.
WHO (2009), ‘Guidelines for the psychosocially assisted
pharmacological treatment of opioid dependence’, World
Health Organization, Geneva.
27
European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction
Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union
2012 — 27 pp. — 21 x 29.7 cm
ISBN 978-92-9168-559-2
doi: 10.2810/72819
How to obtain EU publications
Our priced publications are available from EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu/),
where you can place an order with the sales agent of your choice.
The Publications Office has a worldwide network of sales agents. You can obtain their
contact details by sending a fax to (352) 29 29-42758.
TD-SI-12-001-EN-C
About the EMCDDA
The European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction (EMCDDA) is
one of the European Union’s decentralised agencies. Established in 1993 and
based in Lisbon, it is the central source of comprehensive information on drugs
and drug addiction in Europe.
The EMCDDA collects, analyses and disseminates factual, objective, reliable
and comparable information on drugs and drug addiction. In doing so, it
provides its audiences with an evidence-based picture of the drug
phenomenon at European level.
The Centre’s publications are a prime source of information for a wide range
of audiences including policymakers and their advisors; professionals and
researchers working in the field of drugs; and, more broadly, the media and
general public.
ISBN 978-92-9168-559-2

key issues for Europe`s response to drugs

Transcription

Documents pareils

Background Aim Methods Results Conclusion

diaper

How I Got Pregnant: Should Having a Child be Justified by the

Billing for Prenatal Screening

Tocophobia - the new hysteria?

Dietary management of obesity and diabetes in pregnancy

Appealing Agency Senegal 2014 WORLD FOOD PROGRAMME

581 Summer 13 - Adler Graduate School

Guideline Are you going through an unwanted

Guidelines for the treatment of drug dependence: a European

Bending the private-public gender norms

High Fat Diet avant et durant la gestation : Répercussions sur le

Untitled - Eventtrac

Casino En Ligne Sans Telechargement Sans Depot

Diet during pregnancy Dietary patterns and weight gain rate among

Canada - Kahnawake

review - ceecis.org

Editorial

Treatment systems overview - Council of Europe

Alone Like a Tree: Reintegration Challenges Facing Children Born

dtb.bmj.com Dare we think the unthinkable?

European Questionnaire on Drug Use among Prisoners